Ol' Grumpy and the crushing disappointment of roles

One of the reasons I hate the argument that pure DPS classes should have dibs on top DPS weapons is that in order for me to play a character that uses a two-hander, I have no choice but to play a hybrid. In fact, in order to play as melee DPSer at all, I either have to play a rogue (all three rogue trees dual wield small, fast weapons) or a hybrid. Those are my options. If I wanted to play ranged DPS, I could pick from one of three possible pure classes, but if I want to melee, I'm forced to either give up the weapons I enjoy and take up a playstyle I don't like or accept that I will be forced to DPS at a penalty and be expected and/or pressured to tank.
This to me is asking me to pay twice, and it's unacceptable. Last week, Ghostcrawler posted an excellent discussion on class and role that I highly recommend everyone check out, and it seriously has me pondering what design I'd prefer for World of Warcraft and indeed how I feel about classes and roles entirely.
Cataclysm removes the pure class
If the rogue combat tree could equip, say, polearms and behave like a Blademaster, then I would be playing one. I don't have that option. Frankly, with all polearms being agility weapons now, I think making combat into a two-handed weapon tree would be a fantastic idea. I dislike when class roles become straightjackets that confine my choices unnecessarily or force me to be incapable of excelling at my chosen task not due to lack of skill but an inherent mechanical or systemic advantage given to another class to prop up their percentage of the playerbase.
At the same time, I understand the difficulties. Hybrid classes don't just gain the dubious benefit of being able to respec to tank or heal in order to benefit the other four, nine or 24 people in a group. They also gain access to the utility inherent in their other roles to a degree. No, a feral druid can't be expected to suddenly heal if one of the resto druids goes down. But he or she can use their Tranquility on big AoE damage fights, shift to Innervate or cast Rebirth, go into bear temporarily while someone else battle resses the tank, etc., etc. Druids are an extreme case in terms of hybrid flexibility, of course, and they've also lost quite a bit of it over the years. However, while this ability exists, it's hardly exclusive to hybrids anymore.
Utility abilities like Time Warp, Cloak of Shadows, Cauterize, Ice Block, Deterrence mean that many pure DPSers can do things that previously only two hybrids could do. Anyone who's working on heroic Ultraxion recognizes that druids and warriors would be far worse soakers than rogues, mages and hunters. As more and more utility abilities like Recuperate have been parceled out to pure DPSers, the line between pure and hybrid has grown weaker. Frankly, between all the CC and cooldowns some pure classes have, they've effectively become hybrid. Instead of worrying that hybrid classes do too much damage, we're now in the position of having to consider if pure classes bring too much utility to the table to be called pure DPS anymore.

Roles that we did not expect to play
This to me is the fundamental difficulty of role in MMOs -- it's counterintuitive. I can see emphasizing a light, agile combatant who relies on speed and grace to avoid incoming damage and deal it in return. I can see emphasizing a heavily armored brute who smashes his or her body into the enemy. I can see having archetypes from the Blademaster to the Juggernaut, from the Sentinel to the Assassin. But enshrining tank vs. DPS isn't something most people understand when they first come into this subgenre of game.
I played tabletop D&D for years, and never once did any of my characters think of themselves as meat shields. I killed things. Sometimes I did it with a shield, absolutely. Sometimes I did it in light armor with a great, honking sword. Sometimes I shot people with a bow, and one of my favorite characters used fist weapons exclusively. He was also a lizard man. The point being, none of these characters knew or cared about the dividing line between tanking and DPSing.
Healing at least fulfills a generally understood role that's clearly defined -- you keep your side alive while they make the other side dead (although it too can be confusing for newcomers and costs the player who merely has a healing spec even if he or she never intends to use it, does not gear for it, has never spent a point in it and is absolute rubbish at it). It doesn't matter if you could heal your way out of a fight with a level 16 using grey daggers. You're throttled in your DPS role merely because you have the potential to do it. The group benefits -- it gains your utility and can pressure you into switching to heals. Whether or not you benefit from this is entirely up to you, your willingness to spec, gear and learn to do it and your desire to perform that role.
What defines you best?
This also ignores the inverse. Class role decisions are made for you by the class you choose. If you picked up World of Warcraft, read the class list and decided that man, you liked the sinister and aggressive warlock because the idea of an arcane spellcaster who consorts with demons and learns their secrets appeals to you ... great. Hopefully, it won't turn out that you're an awesome tank -- or if it does, hopefully your group will have another awesome tank so that you're not faced with the prospect of being forced to switch mains. And even if you're not under that kind of pressure, selecting the warlock didn't just close you off from tanking and healing; it also locked you into ranged DPS. And this is despite warlocks' history of special tanking duties and Metamorphosis cooldown, which frankly baffles me. Seriously, look at that talent. All that would have to be is something that stayed up as long as you wanted and it would be a tanking stance.
My argument isn't that we should remove classes' having roles. My argument is more that we should loosen restrictions on those classes based on those roles and diversify those classes. A rogue two-handed weapon tree, a warlock tanking tree, a hunter dual-wield pistol tree (possibly even for ranged tanking -- other games do this and do it well) won't hurt a game that's seven years on and needs to break from its roots to a degree. It's time for role to be something cool that adds flavor, not a governor of what you can and can't do. If this means we all become hybrids to one degree or another, frankly, I think maybe that's already happened.
World of Warcraft: Cataclysm has destroyed Azeroth as we know it; nothing is the same! In WoW Insider's Guide to Cataclysm, you can find out everything you need to know about WoW's third expansion, from leveling up a new goblin or worgen to breaking news and strategies on endgame play.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Cataclysm
Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria news





Reader Comments (Page 2 of 4)
goldeneye Feb 23rd 2012 7:56AM
Yes to Warlock tanking w Metamorphosis. So far, MoP seems to even drop the cooldown. Like a Warlock's Shadowform..
Boz Feb 16th 2012 12:33PM
Let me preface by saying that this was an enjoyable read, but one that left me a bit confused.
Your entry seems to have two underlying themes: One that addresses the desire to equip weapons not designed for your class/spec/role, the other being more general commentary on roles in general. Regardless, I'm not sure I understand your distaste for hybrid classes and two-handed weapons. Multiple DPS classes, such as Arms Warriors, Death Knights, and Ret Pallies use two-handed weapons like Axes and 2H Swords and Maces.
WEAPON VARIETY
If you're just talking variety in general, I agree. Gear decisions - specifically weapon decisions - have gotten a bit boring. Before WotLK, and particularly before Gear iLevel became popular, there were difficult decisions to make when selecting gear.
For example, as a Hunter I'm just waiting for a reskinned polearm (or in rare cases, a staff) with each expansion. Gone are the days of Agility swords and unique two-hander combinations. There were four 2H Agility swords in WotLK, not including Quel'Delar, and there have been zero in Cataclysm. Ditto 2H Axes. 1H weapons are useless to Hunters due to the far, far superior 2H enchant. Rather than looking forward to what new whacky gear Blizzard is going to release in the next expansion, I'm looking for a new interpretation of what I already use with bigger stats.
Hunters are not alone, either: Gear has gotten just as boring for most other classes, tanks especially. Once tanks had to decide between Agility and Tank weapons, which made for some interesting gearing decisions and gave tanks more options.
This is not without solution: As you suggest, gear should be made more diverse (and easily could). Enchants would just need to be modified to accommodate for this. Two-handed enchants would need to be calibrated to match two one-handed enchants, and one-handed weapons would either get an increased stat budget or one-handed weapon sets should get a proc making the set more attractive relative to two-handers.
All players should have a wider range of interesting weapons from which to choose. Allow Death Knights the occasional strength polearm, for example. Further, it allows more Transmogrification options, to boot!
CLASS ROLES
Before the Dungeon Finder I could have cared less that I play a pure DPS class. With Patch 3.3.0, though, that all changed. Now, I believe every class should be able to fill two roles in the queue. to reduce queue times and allow players vested in a particular character to branch out.
As a pure DPS, having three specs that all do the same thing ends up being kind of boring, but I don't want to give up on my main because we've got history. Each class and spec already has viable flavor to back up a tank spec, be it BM Hunters, Frost Mages, etc. It just requires a dramatic redesign - a shake-up the game could use, honestly - to get there.
As Ghostcrawler said, this is probably too dramatic to be likely, and would certainly ruffle more than a few player feathers, but I just don't see the need for three specs that all do the same thing, flavor or not. Give me my Iceman Tank, and a short dungeon queue, and I'll be happier overall.
-----------------
"But enshrining tank vs. DPS isn't something most people understand when they first come into this subgenre of game."
I understand that TERA is aiming to address this very issue, though how that eventually shakes out has yet to be seen. I just wanted to bring this yet-to-be-released competing title to your attention given this comment.
-----------------
"My argument is more that we should loosen restrictions on those classes based on those roles and diversify those classes."
You're saying two things in closing that also have me confused. Are you suggesting we allow pure-DPS the additional ability to tank, or simply the ability to equip additional types of weapons to add some variety to their existing roles?
Happy gaming.
Eternauta Feb 16th 2012 12:54PM
Solution:
Now that Druids have officialy 4 specs, let all classes have 4 specs.
The pure DPS classes should have their 4th spec be either tanking or healing, therefore making every class in the game a hybrid without losing anything we already have.
Example:
Mage: Chronomancer spec: A Wizard capable of healing by reversing time to undo damage and wounds.
Hunter: Beastial Guardian spec: The Hunter uses their pet to keep the enemy away from themselves and their allies.
Warlock: Life-Drainer spec: Uses life draining spells to restore the group's health.
Rogue: Sword Dancer spec: Uses high agility and precise strikes to dodge and parry the enemy's attacks
Problem solved. All classes can do something else other than dps, and no pre-existing specs or roles were harmed.
Where's my medal?
DarkWalker Feb 16th 2012 3:36PM
Making too many weapon choices, with WoW's current loot system and gearing philosophy, means making the loot tables too long, thus making the chance to get each specific weapon too low.
It's why I would love if WoW changed it's gearing philosophy to be less dependent on RNG, allowing players more choices for their weapons. For example:
- Give the current legendary treatment to some raid weapons. The player gets fragments of a weapon/a basic weapon/something else that starts a quest, perhaps even as individual loot. He then goes on a quest to obtain a finished weapon, of the same iLvl as the dropped weapons from that raid tier, but can choose it's final form, allowing way more options.
- Crafting. Have players get something that holds the power for a raid-level weapon (as a BoP drop). An appropriate player crafter makes the shell for the weapon, with many different shell types available. Player inserts power core into shell, gets a customized raid-level weapon.
- Tokens. Boss drops something NPC wants, NPC has raid-level weapons and is willing to trade.
Lastly, there are games that sidestep this issue and allows plenty of options for weapons at each power level. GW2, for example, will have a weapon and an off-hand of each possible kind in every gear set; this should give each character about 5 gearing options within each gear set. GW2 can do this because it uses tokens to grant weapons, avoiding the RNG problems that usually happen when the number of options increase.
Shammytime Feb 16th 2012 5:09PM
I find it interesting, the tank, healer, and dps paradigm. One of my friends that got me into mmo's was an avid player FF XI. In that game you had your tank, your healer, and your dps, but there were also other roles that needed to be filled: your debuffer, your puller, your kiter, etc.
In tbc (i didn't play in vanilla) I would have said that mages and hunters were part of a cc/kiter role and that of a dps. In five mans I saw the rare ret pally shift to helping the healer through a rough part. As playing a rogue during that time, I was asked to stun lock/interrupt a target at the cost of dps.
I think if blizz was able to move back towards a model in which "just" dpsing was the only role that a pure or a dps speced hybrid could do in their current role people would be more content with their class and spec. (plenty of ppl wouldn't for sure but an added challenge never hurt anyone)
eel5pe Feb 16th 2012 12:36PM
How exactly would ranged tanking work, when almost every boss in the game melees?
Homeschool Feb 16th 2012 12:52PM
It's not "tanking from a distance", it's "tanking with ranged weapons". Otherwise, it's exactly the same - attacks, taunts, threat builders, interrupts, and defensive cooldowns.
Lemons Feb 16th 2012 4:58PM
I'd expect that if a warlock or mage were to tank, they themselves would not do the actual tanking. Rather their pets, the Void Walker and Water Elemental, would gain some sort of abilities to make them effective tanks.
Xorthus Feb 16th 2012 12:49PM
Guild Wars 2 is addressing this very issue; every class has the inherent abilities to serve every role. You're however restricted to only a handful of abilities at a time, so its up to you to "spec" into a role. WoW could adopt this model if it proves successful with their competition, they even have in a way with splitting the Feral Druid talents. I'd love to see Destro Locks and Fire Mages learning how to heal with their fire like Alexstrazza, and their talents being split to give them a healer option.
Raposa Feb 16th 2012 12:43PM
Ok, this is the old grumpy article, but man, rossi qqs too much. A few weeks ago he was crying about valor caps and that he COULDN'T play his main because of not getting more valor points. And now "People will pressure me to tank, this is unacceptable". Well boo hoo, man up and tell them you're there to DPS. Problem solved.
adamjgp Feb 16th 2012 1:28PM
The fact that he's getting pressured. Not that he can't say no. He's trying to find a way that the group doesn't pressure him into switching. I ran into this issue with my guild at one point. We were in Firelands, and our regular MT didn't make it, so they looked to me and the other warrior to switch to a tanking spec. At the time I had a fury for pve and arms for pvp spec, so I had to hearth to org, respec, and re-do my keybinds. I did it to help the group, but personally, I didn't want to do it at all.
Nyold Feb 16th 2012 1:30PM
ok I didn't read the article about valor cap, but I'm not gonna, so I'm just gonna say this one sentence: If there's not valor cap, or the cap is higher, wouldn't you be pressured more by having to grind more every week?
Sounds like your main issue is pressure. Well, I understand you're in a high-end hardcore progression guild, but maybe, if there is so much pressure to do something specific, maybe you're not having fun anymore? Either change the game or change the guild.
Whatever Blizzard does, there's always pressure to do something. Give all classes all roles? Then pressure to be able to tank and heal and dps really well. Give all classes one role? Be prepared to be pressured to ROLL a new class if your guild is short on healers.
In A World (XBL) Feb 16th 2012 2:02PM
As someone who enjoys tanking, dpsing, and healing, the word "pressure" just doesn't register with me. I don't really understand what the big deal is. If someone is trying to make you tank then you should say to them "well why aren't YOU tanking? hmm? stop being a backseat driver and re-roll if it's so important to you"
tmenzel Feb 16th 2012 12:43PM
Outstanding article.
Druids are getting a 4th tree in Mists. Monks will be hybrids. Why not give Warlocks a tanking tree? What about a Mage Evasion Tank? Let them Timeslip or Blink or Mirror Image to avoid damage.
Letting more classes fill more roles is good. But I also like your idea of de-emphasizing the role of role; specifically the Tank. Few other RPGs have the tank's role codified to such a degree.
I remember dungeoning with friends who were new to the game. They were trying to avoid standing close to the enemies during combat because they figured that the enemy would be morel likely to turn and attack someone close by. The concept of "tank as threat holder" hadn't really sunk in for them yet, and the artificiality of the specific threat rules of this game hadn't become ingrained.
Killik Feb 17th 2012 4:05AM
Funny thing is, your friends were right - the threshold to steal aggro is significantly lower in melee range.
Luke Feb 18th 2012 11:47PM
@Kilik
Wait what? I've never heard of that.
Now there are some monster/boss abilities that are specifically triggered within melee range. Is that what you mean?
evoxpisces Feb 16th 2012 12:43PM
I would love to see the rogue combat tree allow the use of 2-handed weapons. But please correct me if I'm wrong, but at some point in WoW history (Vanilla or BC) weren't rogues able to equip all weapons except wands? I only started playing a rogue during Wrath so I'm not 100% sure but I could've sworn they were able to use all weapons back then.
Narayana Feb 16th 2012 12:45PM
I agree whole-heartedly. I've been playing a mage since Vanilla. I love my mage and ranged DPS as an idea in much the same way it seems you love 2-handers. One of the constant issues that I have had with mages comes from the fact that no matter how you slice and dice it, we have one role to fill: ranged DPS. As such, unless our 3 trees are perfectly balanced (in which case my entire spec decision comes down to what color thing I want to throw) there will ALWAYS be a "right" answer for what a mage should spec.
I think that part of the solution is not only to make everything a hybrid, but to make every class a hybrid at the same time- every class would be able (and expected to) do 2 things at once. Part of what would need to happen is here is we would need to expand the definition of "role" beyond the strict Tank/DPS/Healer. Bring back the idea of a buffer and a de-buffer- expand upon the Disc Priest idea of pro-active healing. These things aren't necessarily fun on their own two feet, but they'd be much more fun when paired with something "pure."
Back to my mage example, what if the mage was broken down into 3 specs: Fire is DPS/de-buffer, Arcane is DPS/buffer and Frost is DPS/proactive healer(protector). All of a sudden, my job is far more engaging than it is right now (stand there and pew) and it opens up the field for another class to do equal DPS to me while fulfilling another role.
Tom Feb 16th 2012 12:48PM
QQ
Cuddles Feb 16th 2012 12:52PM
Great post!
Before the Mists announcement, I had decided I was a fan of the "hybrid tax" on dps. In my spare moments, I even came up with a tweak to the buffing system that allowed individual dps specs to do equivalent damages one-on-one, while allowing the "pures" to do more in raids/groups. (Not very complex, basically just give raid buffs to the hybrids; the buffs would be required for the hybrids to do "normal" damage, and would allow the pures to do normal+5%. That way would encourage a raid to bring both pures and hybrids.
But Blizz went the complete opposite direction. And honestly, I respect where they're going. This basically means they will have 34 classes going into Mists, instead of 11. But it removes the need for any kind of hybrid tax.
I will say that I think they've gone a bit too far; I chose to play a shaman and then a paladin because of their flexibility and the different ways they could handle challenges. (I'm very much miffed by the removal of exorcism and holy wrath from tankadins...I use holy wrath all the time and exorcism was a great single target opener, and filler during certain "stand way over there" phases.) But hopefully they'll loosen up and put these back in.
And your idea of combat using polearms (and agility staves?) is brilliant. These are only stat sticks for hunters (and ferals??) now, correct? And with the changes coming in Mists, only Monks would be using them...maybe? A whole genre of weapons that none of the original classes actively uses in combat is a shame and a waste. Rogues with pole arms/staves would really give the that ninja feel. :)
Also, give me a dodge/parry rogue tanking spec and I would probably level one.
I'm just going to put it out there, I think 4th specs are coming. Maybe not in mists, and maybe not for all classes, but I think Blizz knows that with Monks out soon, they've tapped all their new class potential. All they're left with is variations on themes. (This couldve been handled before within trees like feral, but now Blizz has given itself the locked-spec model.) If nothing else, the new shaman Ascendance (basically GoAK for Shammies) spell is crying out for an Earth Ascendant.